Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: Mingo88, TABLE SETTER 11; 66 anonymousDiscussion: Steve Imlay suspension
| Posted | Discussion |
| April 23, 2007 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Steve Imlay suspension I am a teammate of Steve Imlay. Unfortunately we were only able to play in two tournaments together. The first one was in the Ft. Myers Winter National last November. We played together with Travelodge 55's in the Major category. Steve is a snowbird. In 2006 he satisfied his requirement by living in Indiana for 90 days. For 2007 his intention was to play with Travelodge. Pursuant to that election he contacted SSUSA and received clearance to play on Travelodge for the Winter National. We won the Winter National. I always thought that the Winter National counted as the first tournament for the next year. However, the winner of that tournament was allowed to play in the first Tournament of Champions held in Winter Haven this past February. Sometime after winning the Tournament of Champions his residency came into question. Unfortunately for his team but fortunately for Steve he took a new job. His new job would not allow him to work out of Indiana for part of the year as he intended. So the question of whether or not he would be able to play with Travelodge came into question. As a result of his honesty and integrity he advised SSUSA that he would be unable to satisfy the residency rule as he intended in Indiana as a snowbird for 2007 and would not be able to continue to play with Travelodge. My question is this--if he satisfied the snowbird rule for 2006 why was he suspended? If his suspension was due to not being able to satisfy the residency rule for 2007--how can that decision be made in the Spring of the year in question? If at the time of participating in the Winter National he was legal why wasn't he legal for the Tournament of Champions? If the Winter National is for 2007 isn't the problem due to SSUSA allowing this winner to compete against 2006 champions? I am certainly not questioning the wisdom of SSUSA in allowing our team to participate. The problem that was created was due to that decision; however, and as a reult the residency rule cannot be decided until the end of 2007. I believe clearer rules regarding this nuance would have prevented any misunderstanding. Based on these facts and on behalf of Steve Imlay and his teammates we respectfully request that SSUSA reconsider their decision and remove the suspension. Bob Schulz Travelodge 55's |
| April 23, 2007 CAT 200 posts | It is difficult as it is to get fair competition at the Major + level. There should be some exception to the basic rules for this division of softball. One of my suggestions is that if you are with the same Major + team for over a period of time (say three years) then yuo should be on the roster no matter where you live. But once you leave that team, the rules change. Afterall, if you are on a team for that periond of time, it should be assumed that you are playing with them because of you friendships. |
| April 23, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | BOB 55: I am glad that u r stand' up 4 Steven. Steven, was given permission to play in the T.O.C., by a Senior SS-USA Staff. Before Steven, played in the T.O.C., Steven, informed SS-USA, that he (Steven), had moved back to Vegas. Steven, also, told SS-USA, that he (Steven), was play' 4 the 55 G.S.F., out of Ca. SS-USA, gave Imlay, the O.K. Steven's, problem..... Steven, did not get the O.K., in writting. The last several yrs, Steven & I, had been tak' B.P., 2 to 4 times a wk. From Feb 2006, to late Oct or early Nov, 2006, Steven, did not hit w/ me, or any of the other guys, that hit on Tuesdays & Thursdays. I have been told by a few Vegas men, that SS-USA, called them about Steven. It is believed that two 60 yr ol' players did not tell the truth about Steven. The point here, it that Steven, came back to ck. on his home & drive one of his cars back to Ind'. I do not know many men that do not travel several times a yr. In the last 3 months, I & other Vegas players have gone out of town @ least 5 times in the past 3 months. MY POINT: How many Seniors stay 90 straight days in Town? Most ballplayers go out of town to play ball every 4 to 8 wks. Steven Imlay, is an honest & very nice person. This is a bad rul' by SS-USA. THIS IS WHY, WE THE PLAYERS NEED A commity 4 such hearings. Let's, also, get rid of the SNOWBIRD RULE & let teams pick up 1 player outside their region. This rul' is sad. GOOD LUCK.....The STONEMAN |
| April 23, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | GARY 19: Nice thought, but, were one votes. I do not vote. Some players do not have their right to vote any longer. The SNOWBIRD RULE, was put into place 4 a good reason. If, one is a true snowbird, this or the 1 player out side would be good 4 SENIORS. Again their r players that will bend any rule. I believe this is cheating. But, there r players that c things diff'. I have talked to several Senior SS-USA staffers. The SNOWBIRD RULE, caues Fran, one big head ache. Hopefully, SS-USA, will drop the SNOWBIRD RULE & allow teams to pick up 1-2, players from outside their boarders. Long time friends... teammates, should be able to stay together & play ball. GOOD LUCK.......The STONEMAN |
| April 23, 2007 E. Ness 122 posts | Gary 19 your suggestion does not cover those who are rated Major Plus players and live in a state and region that does not have a major or major plus team to play on. Once again this means they cannot play senior softball in the SSUSA. Most of the other associations have gone back to the one to two player out of region rule. SSWS allows two, SPA allows one, USSSA allows the whole team, ASA allows one, and the NSA is allowing one on a player by player bases for the major plus divisions. Why is it that only the SSUSA, LVSSA, and ISSA cannot see the wisdom of this rule? Get rid of the snow bird rule and go to this one player rule instead. Things would be easier for both the player and associations. I have played on a team for seven years now and this year because my job moved me back to Missouri I can only play one tournament with this team which is not right. I am being forced to play AAA and if I play it will cause all kinds of crap. Already been there and done that. I get accused of sandbagging by other AAA teams and complaints are voiced but they seem to only fall on deaf ears. |
| April 23, 2007 lv3rd Men's 75 12 posts | I certainly am not knowledgeable of all of the rules surrounding the 'snowbird' cards but I wonder if anyone is. However, I have known and played ball with Steve Imlay both here in Nevada as well as in Indiana for many years and if there is a more honest, curtious, and generous person playing senior softball I sure would like to meet them. The fact that Steve was honest enough to check with the people running the TOC to get permission to play, in my book, solves this issue regardless of the 'fineline' rules. This suspension is a bad rapp against someone who contributes much more than his share to senior softball. What a sham!!!! Jerry Hester Las Vegas, NV. |
| April 23, 2007 E. Ness 122 posts | PS the reason we play senior softball is to play not to be retired or forced to play where one does not belong. As far as losing the right to vote. Where does it say people who no longer have the right to vote cannot play senior softball? They have the same right as anyone else does to play. I deal with this everyday. I do my best to protect this country from people who want to destroy it and have put many in prision but they are still human beings and still have certain rights both in and out of prison. So the answer to your question is yes we should worry about those who have lost their right to vote. They are seniors wanting to play senior softball too. |
| April 23, 2007 E. Ness 122 posts | PPS, Steve Inlay suuspension is wrong and the SSUSA knows it. Steve is an honest man who tried to do his best to do the right thing. His problem was the team who protested him. I often wonder how things like this can be justified when a conflict of interest is involved. |
| April 23, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | Gary 19: Take time to think this one out. There r laws that will not let every SENIOR play. What about our friends North & South of our boarder? What about our Pacific Islanders, Caribbean, & U.S. Territorys? U r being judgemental & petty, when u stated, " do we really need a rule for them." But, that is your right. I try to act & think along another line. The SNOWBIRD RULE, if, used in the matter that that rule was made, does help SENIORS. We can also, add the EXEMPT RULE & this will also, help some Players that do fall between the cracks. After all, why, should ol' friends not be allowed to play toether? Or is it, that some of us SENIORS, care about winning a ring? It appears, that winning a ring is most Important, not the play' or FREINDSHIP. GOOD LUCK....The STONEMAN P.S. E. NESS & JERRY, thanks 4 stick' up 4 our friend. |
| April 23, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | The snowbird rule has been mentioned many times on this board. Frequently, it is confused with the 'exemption player' or out-of-the-area player rule. There are totally separate and distinct. In my humble opinion, the snowbird rule should be dumped. There have been too many instances in which it has been abused. Even if it's used 'correctly' it is very difficult to monitor and, because of this, it leaves a bad taste in someone's mouth. it is primarily for this reason that I'd like to see it go away. The 'exemption player' rule has merit as long as it's applied fairly. As E Ness states, and I believe him, he has a limited access to major + teams as a resident of MO. In 2004 there was an 'out of the area' exception that was used in SPA and some others assns. To qualify as one of these, a player had to sign a form that stated he/she couldn't play on any other team except the one he was applying with. In speaking with Ridge Hooks, I know that he doesn't want to create a 'have bat, will travel' scenario... he merely wants to allow folks such as E Ness the opportunity to play when it otherwise doesn't exist. One of his stipulations is the west/east of the Mississippi River rule... eastern teams must not look west of the MI River for a player and v.v. The snowbird rule, on the other hand, was insitgated to allow players the chance to play when they were on the road to their second home. As it may sound, this was almost exclusively intended for retired people. But even the retirees could only play with one team in national tourneys and they had to stipulate, in advance, which team it would be. The burden of proof of whether the player was 'qualified' to play on this basis rested with the player. As an aside, one of our players (So Cal) asked to play with an LV team in Boaz, Al 4 years ago. The CA border was closed at the time but he had an AZ address as well... a legitimate 2nd home (at that time, neither he nor I knew that this required 90 days on continuous residence). I personally called RB Thomas to see if this was ok... he told me that if the player used the AZ address that it would be his address of record for the balance of 2003. Because of this, our player didn't go to Boaz. Those of us that wish to see the geographic rules changed should first determine which players that we're trying to assist. Is it the player that is 'land locked' or the player that wants to play with anyone he can, whenever he can. They are not the same person. Bob Woodroof |
| April 23, 2007 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Residency: Since SSUSA requires birth certs for verifying age, let that be the state of residency. That would simplify alot. Personally alot of people move to the warmer climates when they feel like it. Just how many let it be known that they have multiple residences. A drivers license is actually another good form but I know of a few that have more than one and it is usually illegal to copy one to use for any form or ID. Use state of birth and limit player to playing in that state except where your allowed to pick up one from out of the area.... That would really put the screws to alot of players I know, but it was just a thought for residency. DLN's & Voter registration are the best but both together should verify the other. |
| April 23, 2007 E. Ness 122 posts | The Wood is right on with his assessment. Ridge did it right in my opinion with dividing the country in two halfs at the Mississippi and I bet he will not have any problems this coming year. Bob did you guys ever get rooms in KC? |
| April 23, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Taits: I was born in Tennessee... but have lived in California for 49 years. If I understand your point correctly, I'd have to play for a TN team. Correct me if I'm wrong... Bob Woodroof |
| April 23, 2007 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | The wood, it was only for residency verification, but I did say it would be really tough because most every one moves at one point in life. Gary19: I held TX and CA liscense for years. Actually had 1 for HI as well. I finally gave up the HI & TX ones I had because I wasn't going back for a long time. But yes, it is now not supposed to happen and is supposed to be where you live. But Again if you hold multiple residences.....snowbird.... go figure. But feel the DLN is the best. |
| April 23, 2007 tattooball 774 posts | It's actually a crime to hold a drivers license in two states at the same time. |
| April 23, 2007 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | trumpball, your correct, it is. I do not currently hold more than one, but it's still possible. And given the great governamental cooreparation between its agencies, one can still manage it. |
| April 23, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | TRAITS: Scott, wrong again. The more rules we make the more 'cheating', bend' the intent of the rule, & more people will fall thru the crack. EXAMPLE: I am an Army brat. I was born overseas. I do not have an Am' birth cert'. I have a PROOF OF U. S. NATIONALIZATION PAPER, that took me 25 yrs to get. I have just gotten a new PASSPORT, good until 2017. THRUMPBALL: I believe that Comm' truck drivers can have 2 licenses & in the Military, equipment operators need to have a Military Licenses. In most of our SENIOR ORGANIZ', the women & 75 & older men, have the West / East of the Miss' rule. IF, RINGS WERE GIVEN ONLY in the Major Plus Division, Major in the 75 & 80 Division, would we SENIORS, really have this problem? Why, should long time friends not be allowed to play together? If, a person moves away, why r they discriminated against? I thought, or right ,I am try' to think? Is SENIOR BALL main reasons: 1) to have fun 2) stay in shape 3) renew or make new freinds that r our age. Or, it it to Win a Ring. LET'S PLAY & have FUN.....The STONEMAN. |
| April 23, 2007 Cimarron 10 posts | I have never totally understood the "Snowbird" rule. It may be a good rule or it may not be a good rule. But what I do know is Steve Imlay. I played with Steve and managed him for a whole year. I got to know him and Carroll (his wife) on a deeper level. Steve's philosophy was always to find out what the rules are and to follow them to the letter. He never tried to beat or go around the rules. He always conducted himself with very high integrity and he demanded his teammates do the same. It is is for these reasons that I believe that he was not treated fairly. I know that ignorance is not a defense but in this case I must believe that Steve was given mis-information and acted on it in good faith. It had to be a missunderstanding because Steve would never endorsed anything but following the rules. I hope that SS-USA reviews this case and reconsiders what I believe to be an unjust penalty for a misunderstanding. Senior Softball Player, Alan Dial |
| April 23, 2007 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | I would like to share my thoughts on Steve with everyone reading this. I am new to Senior softball (50's) and have lived in Las Vegas for 4 years. When it came time for me to play senior softball the Las Vegas senior softball community was less than generous to me. There were 3 exceptions, Steve Imlay, STONEMAN and Jerry Hester. Steve has gone out of his way to make me see that Senior softball is worth my time and can be a fun way to spend an afternoon shooting the B.S. and enjoying what little time left we have to play. That is a nice gift to give someone. Too Steve, Jerry, and Stoney we got a date on June 9th in Mesquite we're going to hit some bombs in that unlimited Home Run tourney. Joe Lecak Las Vegas Nevada |
| April 23, 2007 tattooball 774 posts | No it is still illegal to hold two state drivers license's. I am not sure about military but state DL's you can only have one. If you are a commercial driver, it is the license for all the class ratings you qualify for including a passenger car. Also commercial license's are subject to a much stiffer blood alcohol limit. (Ibelieve .o5) |
| April 23, 2007 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | stoneman, Stephen, Your right about the rules, but the question I believe was about some way to verify residency. I believe I only sugesseted some. The DLN does seem the best, but as you said the military is a pproblem, I had one of those too. As well as alot of public utility companies also have thier own, like PGE. I had one of those too. But in the end the snowbird thing is a mess. |
| April 23, 2007 Sisavic 190 posts | Snow Birds and out-of-area players were discussed in detail at the Summit Meeting this January. The Advisory Board, representing players, made a few recommendations which are presented on p. 9 in the Spring 2007 Edition of the Senior Softball News. The Summit's responses are also included. See items 2 & 3. We'll all see what the Summit decides for 2008. |
| April 24, 2007 Cliff 21 Men's 55 13 posts | As a close friend of Steve Imlay, I have played with him and against him on the diamond. Anyone who knows him will attest to how much senior softball means to him. In fact if there's anyone who loves softball more than me it would be Steve. What I will add to that is that Steve is also a man of honesty, integrity, and character. The last thing he wanted, epecially in this time of increased scrutiny of snowbirds, was to put Travelodge at risk for using an ineligible player. For tha reason he contacted tournament oficials well before the tournament, exlained his situation in an upfront manner and was cleared to play. I agree that snowbird rules are both confusing and sometimes downright unrealistic, as in the word "consecutive" regarding the 90-day rule. But as one myself, I blieve the concept is a good one. Regardless, this is not an open and shut case where someone openly flaunted the rules. Steve still has a house in Indiana , his family all live there and some of his boyhood pals play on Travelodge. It is not a case where a snowbird used a halfway house or YMCA or vacant lot address, and he shouldn't be punished as such. And exactly how does one satisfy 2007 snowbird requirements when the year had yet to take place? At any rate, I can attest to the fact that the last two months have been a nightmare for both he and his wife Carol, who is totally involved with his softball and has taken this as hard as Steve. Ruth Realty stated that they did not wish to pursue the championship we won at the TOC. And it is acknowledged that Steve Imlay cannot play for Travelodge in 2007, that is not the motivation here. The purpose of this letter is to state my support as well as that of my teammates for Steve Imlay and to ask that SSUSA do the right thing and remove his suspension. Cliff Noble Travelodge |
| April 24, 2007 CRUSADERVB Men's 70 275 posts | ANOTHER VOTE FOR STEVE IMLAY...........I HAVE PLAYED WITH AND AGAINST STEVE FOR OVER 30 YEARS. HE HAS BEEN THE NICEST PERSON I HAVE EVER MET ON AND OFF THE FIELD!! STEVE CHECKED WITH SSUSA AND RECIEVED PERMISSION FROM ''A STAFF MEMBER'' TO PLAY...........THEN WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO PUSH AND SHOVE THEY DID NOT BACK WHAT THEY TOLD STEVE!! STEVE KNOWS THE RULES, AND WHEN IN DOUBT HE CHECKED WITH SSUSA FOR A RULING AND WAS GRANTED PERMISSION TO PLAY!! THE SUSPENSION ''HAS'' TO BE LIFTED. STEVE DID NOTHING WRONG!!! BIG BIRD.........STEVE....YOUR DA MAN!!!!!!!! |
| April 24, 2007 Mango Men's 50 159 posts | This is probably going to sound naïve but here goes. Why can’t anyone play with whoever they want to play with whenever they want? What’s the purpose of the residency rule? Mango |
| April 24, 2007 Nancy Allen Men's 55 1438 posts | Steve Imlay is one of the nicest men that I have ever met in or out of softball. I could bore you for hours on the kind deeds that I know of that he has done with no ulterior motives. He has done much over the years for senior softball in Indiana and Nevada. I know that I did not live in Indiana for ninety days in 2007 as of November 2006 or February 2007 either. Steve is a very honest person, and I believe that he was punished for his full disclosure because he has ethics. Anyway those of you that know me will realize that I very rarely say things that might hurt someone's feelings or pride, but this will be one of those times, and if I offend anyone, I apologize now. On the subject of ethics, in the real world, people should be very sensitive about conflicts of interest. This would include someone who holds a position with an association and also has a team playing in that association. It seems to me after an incident such as this that it would be proper for them to recuse themselves from one or the other. I feel this all boils down to ethics, and I am not questioning Steve's. If I am wrong, please convince me otherwise. |
| April 24, 2007 E. Ness 122 posts | Back a few years ago there was a team that was sponsored by D Smith playing senior softball. His team was one of the best as was a team from Texas and a couple of other places. These teams were fully sponsored teams who played in the Major Plus division. The of course was back when the division was much larger than it is now. To make a long story short the powers to be decided it would be in the best interest of senior softball not to allow these types of professional teams any more. To restrict players to their region thus ridding the sport of fully sponsored teams and in their words increasing the numbers of players at all levels. Problem is it decreased the number of teams at the Major Plus level and Major level. It allows for forced sandbagging and it causes situations like this. The snow bird rule was never a problem until the regional rule was put in place. One of my questions has been from the beginning is this. The powers to be said this is just senior softball we don't need fully sponsored teams. This is just for fun. And yet rings are given away for the best teams each year at the different worlds, we have a senior hall of fame that seems to only elect major and major plus players, we travel all over the country to PLAY THE BETTER TEAMS TO MAKE OUR TEAMS BETTER, and of course we have end of the year world tournaments. To me we are no different than the associations where all ages play. We are just as competitive (maybe more so) and play just as many tournaments. This has become big business and is not the rec senior softball we were told it was when the regional rules were put in. The only difference between us and the USSSA, ASA, NSA, or ISA is our very stupid regional rules that have done nothing to add numbers to the Major and Major Plus divisions. All it has really done is decrease the number of teams at those levels, caused this problem with the snowbird rule, and retired players who cannot play below their playing level and have no team. The regional rule for Major Plus is out dated and does not work and everyone knows it. The problem is some don't want to admit it and admit there is a confict of interest problem in more than one association. |
| April 24, 2007 Carroll 1 posts | The suspension of Steve Imlay has not only affected him, but me as well. I am Carroll, his wife. It has been very difficult on Steve, and we have gone through many weeks of anguish. I am not writing to debate the snowbird rule, nor am I going to debate the specific details of how we are at this juncture. I will leave that up to you gentlemen. However, I have listenend to numerous conversations, read all your messages, and can no longer sit back in silence. Steve loves playing softball. He practices harder than anyone else I know. He would take batting practice everyday, if he could. Never having sponsorship with teams we've played with, he has willingly helped previous teams and players numerous times. He has helped with entry fees, paid for hotel rooms, airfare, and car expenses for teammates in need. I can't tell you how many times he's picked up meal expenses for guys He has never asked or expected anything in return. He has always maintained a positive attitude on and off the ball field. People will pass judgment when they hear of Steve's suspension. Softball, being a competitive sport, will produce friends as well as enemies, but it is my hope that those who really know Steve will know that he would never intentionally deceive Senior Softball. Though he has had many offers to falsify information for his benefit, he would never do it. He always said he wouldn't cheat to play, and never wanted to do anything that could hurt his chances of getting into the Hall of Fame. He has always maintained that though he truly enjoys playing the game, his main motivaton is the friendships he makes. He has been a good representative of senior softball, and is a good and honest man. This whole ordeal has been stressful, to say the least. The suspension is very painful. Nonetheless, through this ordeal, we've come to realize how blessed we are to have our health, families, friends, and each other. To know Steve, is to know that he is not a liar or a cheat. I am truly touched by those of you who have expressed your support of Steve, and me. I am sincerely grateful. |
| April 24, 2007 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | I have read this line of messages several times for the past couple days. It's popular to say the least. I don't know Steve. Most of you that do seem to say nice things about him, but maybe that's the wrong approach right now. In most every suspension situation I have seen over the many years, regardless if it's sport or business or school (except maybe the military academies) or whatever, there is almost always an appeal process. I presume that ssusa is the same. Is it 30 days? Is it 60 days? How does it work? Whatever it is, I think the best way to get a reconsideration is not going to come from how many "Steve is a good guy, he really misses playing softball and he would never cheat on purpose" messages get posted here. Those are probably nice to read if you're Steve or Carroll, but I'm guessing the best thing right now would be an appeal based on facts. Am I missing something here? Good luck Steve. Your friends seem to think something unfair has happened. |
| April 24, 2007 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | DesertGuy, You raise a valid point. Maybe an appeal process is the way to go. One problem. Steve trusted what he was told on the phone and did not wish to impugn or question the authority or integrity of the official at Senior Softball who advised him he could play by asking for it in writing. The appeal process would require proof. How do you prove what can't be seen in writing when the individual will no longer stand behind what was said. We therefore are left to rely on the willingness of SSUSA to rely on statements about his character to determine whether an injustice has indeed occured with regard to Steve's suspension. Some facts are clear. He was allowed to play in the Winter National. No questions were asked because it was cleared by SSUSA. Therefore he is allowed to play in the TOC which he did. Probably wouldn't have been a question asked; however, we won the tournament. Some time after that the questions arose. Ask yourself if there is something suspicious here. This being the case it would be easy to say "tough luck." Read again, if you will, some of the things that have been written about Steve and more, I hope, to come. Then again, ask yourself--Is this right? The answer is no. If the suspension stands it will be a mistake and maybe a lesson learned for all to consider when dealing with SSUSA and relying on what you are told. Will it be necessary in the future to get everything in writing. Many of these same decisions are made every day by the SSUSA officials. If SSUSA did this to prove a point they picked on the wrong guy. Once again I respectfully request that Steve be reinstated and hope that the softball community will stand behind Steve to get this accomplished. Bob Schulz |
| April 24, 2007 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | Bob- I think you missed my very simple point. I don't have any reason to believe anyone's version of the facts here. But I think I do know one fact for sure. A bunch of messages posted here are not going to make up a valid or formal appeal, and suspensions only get overturned if someone makes the proper appeal by the proper prcedures and within the valid time limit for that. Your facts may well be right. I don't know. Ssusa's facts may well have been right. I don't know that either. But I can almost guarantee that whatever appeal process ssusa might have doesn't call for counting up how many message board posts can be piled up on Steve's behalf. No one should shy away from being an aggressor if they think they were wronged. That's exactly what the appeal process is for. Sometimes people get bruised a little bit when the real facts get sorted out. It's really nice that you all are coming here to support him. Too bad it's not going to do any good. The appeal is the only chance he has to get a reconsideration. |
| April 24, 2007 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Somethings wrong somewhere. Steve Imlay is a great guy and competitor. So is Doc DeMarco of the Old A's. I'm with Mango on this one. Why should there be any restrictions at all in Major Plus Ball. No one asked ME? A National Champioship at the Major Plus level is sweetest in the sense that the winner stands atop the softball world and can say he/she is the best and has beaten the best there is available to play. I want you to bring the best players you can find anywhere any time and any place so I can beat them fair and square and I know I share this sentiment with just about all my major plus buddies. Steve and Doc are great guys and great players who have been singled out for a much bigger problem than they and their teams are responsible for. Let all the teams bring anyone they want and as they said to start the battles in the Roman Coliseum "Let the games begin." |
| April 24, 2007 michigan native 5 posts | what is a major plus player doing playing in a major tournament |
| April 25, 2007 Funk 66 posts | I have gotten to know Steve Imlay over time as a manager, coach, teamate and friend. Steve is a man of high personal integrity. Steve has a commitment to the game of softball that is unsurpassed by anyone else. I strongly believe Steve's suspension is unfair !!! The snowbird rule has lots of flaws which can cause unfair situations for people. I believe Steve was a victim of these flaws. Steve is clearly known as a person who respects the game. This suspension has negatively affected Steve and his family his teamates and friends. It is my opinion that Steve did not abuse this rule. I strongly believe the snowbird rule and its enforcement needs to be reevaluated. George Robinson. |
| April 25, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | I am vey much in the middle on this matter. I have known the Imlays for 2 years and concur with almost everything that has been stated about them. I would add that they are also very hospitable people whether you're a teammate or an opponent. I also consider Fran Dowell a close friend and she's taken a bit of a beating in this case. A lot of well-meaning people have, directly or indirectly, made her out to be the 'fall gal'. She is the primary reason that GSF participates in SSWC events. I wasn't privy to their phone dialogues and I suspect that few others were either. Regardless, this matter is not about their conversation as much as it's about the underlying issue... did Steve satisfy the snowbird requirements or not? I do not live in LV and, consequently, cannot know when he was there or not. But if he was in IN the required amount of time he should be able to prove it in some manner. SSWC has given all of us the right to freely express ourselves on this web site. This is true even when we feel negative toward them as an organization. We have the right to support Steve and Carroll as this is a difficult time for them. My question (rhetorical) is this... do we have the right to make insinuations about Fran's chararcter? Or Bill Ruth's character? Does the person that indirectly linked him into this matter really have any specific knowledge connecting him to the investigation? Or is she just 'connecting the dots'? Do we really know enough about this issue to impune anyone? Express your support for Steve and Carroll (as George and others have done) but be careful about making hurtful statements about someone else unless you have firm proof? Bob Woodroof |
| April 25, 2007 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | The Wood, Nobody is blaming anyone. There is one simple fact and that is that Steve was suspended. Knowing everyone the way you do how do you think this happened? Fact 1: Steve called SSUSA and was cleared to play in the Winter National and there was no problem at that time. Fact 2: Steve played in the TOC since he was on the roster for the Winter National. Fact 3: His residency was called into question after we won the TOC. Fact 4: He had a valid snowbird card for 2006. Fact 5: SSUSA invited the winner of the Winter National (technically the first tournament for 2007) to the 2006 TOC. If you re-read my earlier posts you will find other parts of this matter that are important to note. It seems there is not clear cut logic to what has occurred with regard to Steve's suspension. Since the rules for snowbirds have been questioned over and over Steve did the right thing by obtaining clearance to play. Nobody is placing blame. I have not named names so that no one would feel that they are a target. No one needs to suffer here including Steve. We just need someone to step up and do the right thing. There are two kinds of conflict of interest. One is real and the other is apparent. The parties who could have an apparent conflict of interest should always recluse themselves from these issues. I have every confidence that was done in this instance. This is more than a matter of friendships. Personally I would just like to have my teammates name cleared. He has not done anything wrong. Unless you have proof to the contrary why don't we let SSUSA decide if they think they should reconsider. On another note I think it is time to eliminate borders. Get rid of the snowbird rule. Get rid of the exception rule. Help major+ players who do not have teams to play with in their area. Avoid misunderstandings and save yourself some work. On balance it seems it would be easier. Bob Schulz |
| April 25, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Bob50; I do not know you and vice versa... quite frankly, you do not seem to be that well-informed on this matter. Rather than bring any more public attention to this how about you email me @ awtgroupsc@aol.com. I will be out of my office until tomorrow and will get back to you then. I will, at that time, answer any questions that I can. Thank you, Bob Woodroof |
| April 25, 2007 sliplayer Men's 60 70 posts | It's difficult to see my name associated with such a serious topic as suspension. I really appreciate the effort that so many of you have put into your responses, and I thank you for the kind and gracious words of support. However grateful, I agree with DesertGuy that the character references are not going to instigate change. The true issues to be discussed are the interpretation of the snowbird rule and the fair treatment for any individual that allegedly breaks a rule. What happened to me could have happened to many of you, and unless changes are made in regard to the two items I mentioned, it could still happen to someone. My situation is a private affair with ramifications for us all. My goal was to be treated fairly and honestly and I do not believe that was the case. I have requested information from Terry concerning the appeal process, both by email and phone. He may respond, he may not respond. My understanding is that I must submitt a follow-up letter with any additional information, send it to Terry, and he will make another decision. If this, in fact, is how an appeal process works, then obviously there is a flaw in the system. Shouldn't an appeal go to an unbiased committee or person to gather all the documentation and assist in the appeal process, rather than going back to the original person who determined the suspension? (if anyone truly knows the appeal process, I'd appreciate the information). The snowbird rule states 90 consecutive days in your snowbird location. So, is that residency or physical days? What if your job requires you to travel extensively or you go out of state for a tourney or for whatever reason? How does one really verify that he has another residence and that he is living in that residence for the correct amount of time? As you can see, the rule is vague, and raises alot of questions. Shouldn't an alleged perpetrator be given the opportunity to meet with the Director and explain "his case"? I requested such a meeting and never even received a return phone call. Shouldn't an alleged perpetrator receive full disclosure of who initiated the investigation, or in this case, continued to fuel the investigation, and what the investigation consisted of? It appears that the reasons for my suspension have changed several times; in fact, I'm still not sure exactly what they are saying my final injustice was. Is the claim really thoroughly investigated or are things done to appear as an investigation? When I submitted my documentation to support my case, I thought it was to get to the truth, but instead felt all my conversations and the information I provided was manipulated. Obviously, these are very important issues to me - and to you too. I understand the need for fair and equitable rules, especially in slow-pitch softball. I have always supported those rules and will continue to do so. I would just like them to be enforced consistently and justly for everyone, without bias. This thread is set up to discuss issues and not to attack individuals, and I try to adhere to that philosophy, and recommend all of us do the same. Again, let's discuss the issues: the snowbird rule, and fair treatment for any indivdual that allegedly breaks a rule. Maybe through these discussions, it will become more obvious that we need a player's representative group to ensure fair treatment for players; after all, Senior Softball exists because of us. |
| April 26, 2007 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | Something here doesn't make sense to me. If snowbird statis is awarded to someone with 3 months residency, how can an association disallow sb status if the year isn't passed. Is it awarded for 3 month's residency from the preceding year? What if the player was planning on living 3 months in the other location in Oct, Nov and Dec of othe upcomming year? It seems like the rule needs to be fine tuned. I also think the player's intention should be considered. |
| April 26, 2007 jwilson875 Men's 50 3 posts | Stoneman, I just moved to Las Vegas from Ohio where I traveled with the Ohio Silverdos 50's. Where can I hook up here in Vegs? email at jawilson875@yahoo or call me please at 702-306-4828. thanks, Jack Willson |
| April 27, 2007 Nancy Allen Men's 55 1438 posts | Steve, when you are in Indiana, all of the seniors are playing Tuesday nights at Midwest. There are an awful lot of people that care about you there that would enjoy a visit to share that. You are more than welcome to play if you come out. I am sure the same is true in Nevada. |
| April 27, 2007 studda Men's 40 1 posts | WELL-WELL-WELL. I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SPACE TO REPLY PROPERLY, BUT TO ADDRESS CAROL: NUMBER 1 LEAVE SENIOR SOFTBALL TO THE GUYS. NUMBER 2 STEVE HAS BEEN CHEATING FOR YEARS AND NEVER GOT CAUGHT, SO THIS IS A FAIR SUSPENSION. HE HAS ADDRESSES IN AT LEAST FOUR STATES THAT I KNOW OF. NUMBER 3-THATS QUITE ADMIRABLE FOR STEVE TO FINANCE MEALS AND PLANE TICKETS FOR FELLOW TEAMMATES, BUT HE DID THIS ON HIS OWN AND DOES NOT ENTITLE HIM TO SCORE BROWNIE POINTS TO CHEAT AND BREAK THE RULES. NOW HAVING SAID THAT CAROL- HOW DOES THIS PUT A BURDEN ON A FAMILY OF TWO.? MEANING YOU AND STEVE OF COURSE. THIS IS SOFTBALL CAROL NOT LIFE AND DEATH. CHILL OUT AND DON'T TAKE IT SO SERIOUSLY. YOU CHEAT AND GET CAUGHT TAKE YOUR MEDICINE AND GO TO BED. |
| April 27, 2007 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | STUDDA. All UPPER case and no lower, eh? Well, no lower is a good description for you you gutless piece of crap. Wanna know why? No name, no game. Steve Imlay is a man and quite a good one and competitor, too. So is Doc DeMarco. If you're not willing to stand up for whatever it is you have to say you're not to be listened to and have earned no respect in a community of real men and women. |
| April 28, 2007 Cliff 21 Men's 55 13 posts | Amen, Einstein What could this guy possibly know about integrity & character? Cliff Noble |
| April 28, 2007 lv3rd Men's 75 12 posts | Kudos to you Einstein and Cliff. What a cheap shot at two very good people. Sounds like someone that was in the 'other dugout' most of the games. They obviouslly do not know Steve and Carroll very well. It should be interesting when this person's idenity comes out (and it probablly will eventually). Jerry Hester Vegas |
| April 28, 2007 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Being an old mill hunky studda has the makings of a person from an old steel mill town. Studda you sound like a jealous, lonely old man. Your attack says volumes about you and your lack of character. Joe Lecak Las Vegas |
| April 28, 2007 gary thorsen 2 posts | I played with Steve for the first time in Fort Meyers and it was clear to me that he is a individual of high integrety on and off the field. He also discussed with me the the approval he received from senior softball. He would have never played without that conversation with senior softball. We all know the story and we understand the rule. After Travel Lodge played Ruth in the championship of the winners bracket and beat them that is when the protest should have been lodged. Instead Ruth waits and lodges the protest after playing Travel Lodge 2 more times with Ruth winning the 1st game and Travel Lodge winning the IF game to win the Championship. MY QUESTIONS: 1. Ruth players know Steve why not protest immediately not till after you loose the tournament? 2. Its a fact Steve did talk to a Senior Softball Official and was in his mind given the ok to play 3. I thought the rule is suspension of the player, coach, and the stripping of the title, why did only the suspension occur? At worst its a misunderstanding reverse the suspension. Life is too short |
| April 30, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Snowbird rules: Until last week, I had never looked at the snowbird application. Having now done so, I feel that I understand the rules more thoroughly than before. There have been a lot responses on this thread, which is a testament to Steve's popularity. Anyone wishing to become versant on these rules can find them on this website. Merely click on 'ream ratings and summit' on the left margin. You could also check out the snowbird list in the same manner... if you're the least bit curious. Recognize though that this list hasn't been updated since June, 2006, so it isn't current. In reading several of the posts on this thread, I see the word 'fact' being used quite often. When does something actually become a fact (as opposed to a statement)? Is it a fact because it has been repeated by more than one person or because it can be verified? Gary: Would you feel better about this if SSWC had rescinded your championship? Bob Woodroof |
| April 30, 2007 gary thorsen 2 posts | Bob the point is reinstatement Steve Imlay. He and all of the Travel Lodge players were all led to believe that our roster was legal. If there would have been any question which there wasn't of his eligibility Steve would have not been allowed to play period. Rules are made for good reasons and must be enforced. Since it seems that we are all at fault based on the SSWC ruling my vote would be to take the championship away give it to RUTH and reinstate Steve. Its only a game. |
| April 30, 2007 hornachec Men's 55 50 posts | Gary, I did bring up the question about Steve to Terry at the TOC, before the end of the tournament. Bill Ruth asked Terry specifically to let it go, but questions were raised by other managers at the TOC and the investigation followed.The Ruth team DID NOT lodge the protest!!! Jim Hornus manager Ruth 55's |
| May 1, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | To the WET WOOD: U seam to be a wolf in sheep ....... I am glad that u have shown u're true colors. Which of the follow' Facts do u not believe? STEVEN:: 1) has a 2nd home in Indiana 2) got a new job & was "required" to work in the east. 3) sales computer learn' programs. 4) must travel a great deal in order to work 4 that company. ( This was explained to SS-USA) 5) paid 4 a SNOWBIRD CARD, 6) over paid 4 his SNOWBIRD CARD; & was told that he (Steven), could use his SNOWBIRD CARD 4 the 2006 season only, & there would be no refund, 6) Steven's, moved back to L.V., in the fall, 7) Steven's, ol' employer, wrote a letter, explain' Steven's, job & that Steven, was liv' in Indiana. 8) that SS-USA, was informed that Steven, had moved back to L. V., & was no longer a SNOWBIRD & was it O.K., to start the 2007 season play' 4 G.S.F. 9) that SS-USA, told Steven, that he (Steven), could play 4 G.S.F. 10) SS-USA, was asked if, Steven, could play in the T.O.C., even though Steven, was now on G.S.F.'s roaster. 11) Here is a New Fact.... several Vegas players, asked 4 in writting permission, from SS-USA, to play 4 2 diff' teams out of Az, IN THE T.O.C., (even though the 2 players were not on these teams roaster), when these 2 team did qualified 4 the T.O.C. 12) FACT; SS-USA, did allow teams to pick up players 4 the T.O.C. ( This was the start of the New 2007 season.) WOOD: There r more facts / infor, etc. Again, this is not the 1st time, that SS-USA, has changed horses in the middle of the river. Not only on Steven, but, others. SORRY, 4 this long & in u're face post. .... The STONEMAN |
| May 1, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Gary T; you have my respect. Jim H; I'd been told previously that Bill Ruth had requested that this investigation not be done due to the perception it would create surrounding his team, etc. Stone: I can only conclude that your friendship with Steve has clouded your judgement. If I'm 'a wolf in sheep's clothing', what does this imply about the other folks that have made posts on this matter? Trust me, I prefer to be a wolf than a sheep. Most of your 'facts' are totally irrelevant and/or immaterial. If you would actually read the snowbird application, you'd know that having an Indiana deed, getting an employer's letter, incurring business travel are not synonamous with the snowbird rules. JUST READ IT. To be a snowbird you must reside CONTINUOUSLY in the snowbird state for 3 consecutive months (a bit redundant). So if you play out here in with your own team in said three month perios, you have violated the intent and spirit of the rule. I was not a party to Steve's call with SSWC and neither were you. Yet you speak of it as first hand knowledge. Stone, I have spoken with Steve in person, via phone and via email over this matter. He definitely knows my position. I wasn't aware that I needed to notify you. As far as GSF is concerned, I'm pretty much aware of what is going on within our team. Steve was on our 2007 roster as his PERMANENT residence is in NV and we're CA team. This is a function of the adjoining state rule, not the snowbird rules. Before you begin to pigeon hole me you might want to take a moment to grasp the situation. I'll give you the same courtesy. I know that you feel a loyalty to Steve and I commend this. But it doesn't mean that anyone that opposes his position is evil. If you expect me or anyone else to forget what we know or what we've seen, you're asking too much. Steve hasn't asked this of me. Bob Woodroof |
| May 1, 2007 sliplayer Men's 60 70 posts | Help me understand…Snowbird rule states living “3 consecutive months in your snowbird state” is it possible that situations change during the year because I thought that is the reason that they have a release form. Do legitimate situations occur during the year and even year to year, such as employment? Is the player penalized because of those changes? Do consecutive days mean you are not allowed to leave the state, what if you spend more time in your snowbird state vs. your residence state? Who do you play for when you’re not in your snowbird state beyond the 3 months? Does the qualifying time period transpire the year before, the year after or during that year? The point is this is an ambiguous rule that can be interpreted many ways. Having a deed does not qualify you, agreed, but does residing longer in the snowbird area than in your residence state qualify you? What constitutes the term “living”? Does having a home with a full set of clothes, furniture and receiving mail at that residence qualify you? My point is it’s almost impossible to prove you’re living 3 consecutive months in a residence especially if you’re traveling for work. I believe it was stated in this thread “what was the intent of the player.” Was the intent to cheat or just a bad interpretation or a bad rule? I agree once you study the rule it opens up a better understanding of the rule, but how many of us really understand this rule? Not very many by the responses I have received from people who have given me their interpretation. Steven Imlay |
| May 1, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Steve: As you know, I knew nothing about these rules until now. What I do know I have learned from reading the snowbird application and from speaking with people such as Ridge Hooks. I am not sure that I really like the rules but they are the rules that govern snowbirds. From my dialogues with Ridge and Terry, I found that the '3 months continuous stay' in the snowbird state is to make the snowbird exemption available to only those folks that are in their second home (or vacation rental) for the specified time period. I do not know how they would treat the person that spends 3 months in the secondary state with the only interuptions being business travel or short mini-vacations. However, I do know that the rules do not protect the person that travels home during the 3 months. If they were to scrap these rules it would not bother me. But I'm not a snowbird... it may well bother the folks that do fit within these guidelines. Many people have stated on this thread that they would like to see the snowbird rules simplified. Who could argue this? Until they do I would hope that anyone planning to use these rules will take the time to get a clarification and get it in writing. The latter part is a good practice even in the absence of this incident. Ridge and Terry use the same application form and I'm sure that they have thought this through as much as possible. There are 27,000 members of SSUSA (players with ID cards) and maybe 40 snowbirds (I didn't count them... just guessed at it). They have made this exemption available to a very small part of the total populace... less than 1%. I like Ridge's answer to this on the other side... he allows an exemption player this year (not at all connected to the snowbird rules)... east coast players to east coast teams only (same for the west coast). It is simpler and allows the guys that are 'land locked' to play major plus. There are not that many of them and almost all are in the major + division. Greg Maas of SSWS may allow 2 exemptions (and no east coast/west coast restrictions)... but I'm not totally sure of this. Different assns treat this differently and that's good for all of us... it gives us choices. Bob Woodroof |
| May 1, 2007 4x4 Men's 65 601 posts | It seems to me that the softball community support is overwhelmingly in favor of Steve and Carroll (except for one flaming idiot in all caps) and they are fighting an uphill battle against vague, nebulous rules or loosely constructed concepts regarding the enforcement of these rules. Whether ill conceived or well meaning the rule itself is the letter of the day. My humble suggestion is this. This thread indicates Steve has enough passion for the sport to support others with monetary assistance to pusue their passion. Take some of that money and seek legal counsel representing his interests to remove the clouds from this issue and let the chips fall where they may. Unfortunately in this day and age that is the only way someone can fight or get an even break in the system. I'm not advocating the use of attorneys and am not part of the "legal" community profession wise but sometimes that is the only way to be treated fairly. There need not be a lawsuit, just clarification and resolution whichever way the chips fall the matter will be put to rest. All the words in the world don't seem to be getting anywhere so maybe this is a possibilty. |
| May 8, 2007 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | On behalf of Steve Imlay and his friends I would like to thank all of you for stating your support for Steve. One vocal opponent of Steve's however asked us to check the rules for snowbirds. What I found was a surprising lack of clarity. When the snowbird rule and new application was announced the only rule stated for residency was as follows: "Under the new rules players must live for three consecutive months in each state and they may only play on one of the teams in the World Championships." The snowbird application states that the player certify as follows "I certify that I have been, or will be, living in the 'Snowbird State' for a minimum of three (3) consecutive months." A literal reading of this rule would seem to disqualify almost anyone who would fall into question. I could not satisfy this rule with a literal reading on my principal residence. The questions that arise: If you travel outside your state on business do you still satisfy the rule? If you travel outside your state for softball do you still satisfy the rule? If you travel outside your state for pleasure or vacation for a week or two do you still satisfy the rule? If you check on your principal residence during this time with a personal visit do you still satisfy the rule? If you check on your principal residence and stay there for an hour or a day or a week do you still satisfy the rule? If when you check on your personal residence you play in a local league game do you still satisfy the rule? I could go on. The point is where do you draw the line? How do you draw the line? There are no clear cut rules. Therefore, once again, Mr. Hennesey, when Steve files an appeal, please take into consideration all these items. Also, if you plan to continue allowing snowbirds please clarify the rules or make a simple one or two player exception rule for Major and/or Major Plus teams. Bob Schulz |
| May 8, 2007 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | Gary19- It seems that you are against the snowbird rule pretty much completely, which is okay. However, I would offer one (and only one) reason that I think it is good. Here in Arizona we are used to the snowbirds as a way of life. Not just in softball, but throughout the winter months. They come here and actually live here when the weather is bad where they come from. Having a second home here, or a lease every year, actually does meet my personal definition. The rule probably is vague in some ways. But here's the way I see the problem. Anyone can get the card and no one ever looks into it until someone else complains. I'd be all for having someone prove they should be issued the card at the start instead of later. Just my own opinion, but here in Arizona and probably Florida, there really are snowbirds. Don't mean to prolong this debate much furter, but thought maybe this would make some sense to someone. |
| May 8, 2007 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | Gary19- Couldn't agree with you more. I'm talking about the legit guy living in my area during the winter months. After all, isn't that the real definition of a snowbird? The snow bird rule should be only to allow that guy to play year round if he's lucky enough to be able to live in good weather year round. Nothing complicated about that, until the less than honest ones start getting questionable cards. |
| May 8, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | GARY 19: May I ask u a question(s)? Why, did SS-USA, sell S.I., a S.B. card for 3 -5 yrs? The S.B. rule was 4 players that moved from the North to the South. A player had to choose, play the yr as a S.B., or play in their Home State. A player, had to choose, one & not play in both. I have read the S.B. rule & that rule lack clear "understanding." Would it be better or EZER on SS-USA, to get rid of the S.B. rule & allow 1 or 2 players from outside a teams region? S.I., has homes in the S.W. & the upper Mid West. Steven, moved back to the Mid West due to his employment. Yes, a new job, w/ a new company. With all of this, why, did SS-USA, sell S.I., a SNOWBIRD CARD? STRANGE............. The STONEMAN |
| May 8, 2007 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | STONEMAN- I don't know what the exact facts are for SI, and maybe no one really does. At least it's not obvious here. The real problem comes back to allowing people to get the card so easily w/o having to show they qualify. This always comes up later when someone complains. Same was the case with Doc. If ssusa is going to keep the snow bird cards, and I don't care either way, it should be handled up front instead of later, when it's always a complaint and the person making the complaint is angry at losing. Make any sense? |
| May 8, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Stone: I'm not sure Gary can answer that question... perhaps he can. But the snowbird card, like the basic SSUSA ID card is sold to the persons requesting them. It is up to the buyer to prove that the info on the card application is correct. This was true in the past when there were players that were later found to be underage. This is true today on both the snowbird card and the basic card. As far as the 1-2 out of area players... this may or may not be a good strategy (for what it's worth, I support 1 'out of area guy') but it isn't really pertinent to the snowbird thing. A true snowbird is one that, like DesertGuy stated, spends time in his second home to avoid the winter months (his example). However, it doesn't have to be for that reason... doesn't have to be a north/south thing. But he does have to be in the 2nd location for 3 continuous months... this is what defines the snowbird. The snowbird applicant must state the times that he will be in the 2nd location and should do so each year. The problem occurs when we attempt to merge these two separate and distinct concepts. I used the masculine pronoun but it could be true of women as well. Bob Woodroof |
| May 8, 2007 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | BOB.. We do not care what u think any more. U r the 55 Major Plus player from S. Cal, that brought this matter to SS-USA. In case anyone cares, Bob, has thrown S.I., off his team. Also, there r 4 players that r on G.S.F., that r look' 4 another team. BOB, U JUST WILL NOT LEAVE THIS MATTER BE!! In the last several wks, Bob, may have called some of Steve's friends. Also, in P.S.'s & Vegas, Bob, has talked to several Vegas players about where S.I., was last yr. Bob, u r a jerk, when u tell some of Steven's, friends that Steven, is a cheat & lier. Bye-bye, Bob. Many of the Senior Players, do not respect u. LVSSA & SPA, has no problem w/ S.I.; just u. 4 what ever u're reasons r. I am also, sure that u will need the last say, no matter what. So, Bob, write what u must.... but, many of us c u 4 what u r...... The STONEMAN ............OUT |
| May 9, 2007 sister 1 posts | Studda this is in response to your comments regarding Steve and Carroll. Steve is my brother and Carroll is my sister-in-law. I will tell you this. My brother is not a cheater and he would never do anything to jeopardize softball in any way. As for my brother expecting brownie points for anything he has ever done for anyone is a laugh. He is just a very good hearted person that would do anything for anyone. You can bet if he says he got confirmation over the phone HEGOT IT. What right do you have to say Carroll does not have the right to stand up for Steve. As for his family it is not just him and Carroll he also has 4 children 2 sisters and a morther and father. It has not effected them finacially but emotionally. Because Steve has always LOVED softball. |
| May 9, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Stone: First of all, I'm not sure who We is... perhaps you could elaborate. Secondly, we did suspend Steve from our team as a result of this matter. I had been careful to avoid stating this on this board but I have no control over what you or others write. Our reasons for doing so will continue to be a private matter. But i have communicated them to Steve directly. You feel that you know an awful lot about our team. I'm not sure of how you would since you've never played with us. But no one on our team has a contract so they are free to play with other teams if they so desire. Yes, we have spoken with some of Steve's friends in our own due diligence. As an advisory board member it behooves me to know more about our players than ever before. If this offends you or anyone else, I can only say that we (GSF team) live in a glass house... we must act accordingly. I doubt that this will make much difference to you, since you seem real paasionate about this matter, but the GSF decision was not based upon my input only. Granted, I made the final decision and take full responsibility for it. And, no, not everyone on GSF agreed with it. Had this issue been about an illegal bat (hypothethically) how should we have handled it? you say that I'm not respected... I honestly feel that the folks that matter to me do respect me. Am I universally respected? Surely not. as far as the last word? Feel free... in fact, I had hoped that this would have ended a week ago. I cannot speak for Steve but I'd bet he feels the same. BW |
| May 9, 2007 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Witch hunting, scape goating, going after one or 2 guys and ripping them when an entire system/organization is to blame seems to be operating here and is already doing more damage than it was intended to avoid. The way to solve or resolve these issues and issues like these is with fairness and generosity. You announce that the situation is wide spread and has gotten out of hand. You state the reasons why things occurred and can't occur again. You redefine the system to fit the present reality and lastly and perhaps most importantly, you don't condemn or reward any specific individuals or entities during the process. No teams or individuals should have been "singled out" for punishement or reward until the system and it's contentions had been thoroughly examined and subsequently, redefined. A lot of bad feeling is being generated over these incidents. Valuable and worthy individuals, like Steve and Doc have been singled out and punished, unfairly. and it's sadly unnecessary if the powers that be had ALL of us and not some of us in mind when proclaiming a solution. What's wrong with an organization like SSUSA asking for any feedback regarding controversial situations and rulings affecting all of us, declaring a moratorium/amnesty for any past/present so-called violations and violators, setting up clear and consequential new guide lines and thereby moving ALL of along together, better than ever... A Senior Softball version of no one left behind but this time we make it work. |
| May 9, 2007 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Einstein, Nobody has stated it better. Thanks. Bob Schulz |
| May 9, 2007 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | einstein- Nice comments and well thought out. But remember "When all is said and done, more is said than done." |
| May 9, 2007 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Einstein very well said. In the short time I have known Steve he has been very generous with his time. As we all know that is the most precious commodity we have. A number of us brand new to the Senior game have benefitted greatly from our association with Steve. We had an opportunity to spend some time with Steve this past weekend and he is a wonderful teammate and a tremendous competitor. |
| May 9, 2007 Joncon 328 posts | ""My question is this--if he satisfied the snowbird rule for 2006 why was he suspended? If his suspension was due to not being able to satisfy the residency rule for 2007--how can that decision be made in the Spring of the year in question?""" The answer is simple. Softball has always been a sport that has more than it's share of estrogen induced crybabies. It's the only thing I really HATE about softball and it appears to get WORSE as the players age. "It's not fair" etc etc. Why should it matter where someone lives? We are all just a bunch of old men playing a girls game so shut up and play. |
| May 9, 2007 AZTOMC Men's 55 139 posts | Joncon I can't believe your nurse let you back on the internet or did you sneak on again. ;) |
| May 9, 2007 sliplayer Men's 60 70 posts | Einstein- Your eloquent statements are right on target. This is really not about individuals but a process that is flawed. It’s about fairness and honesty. What has this action really accomplished for Senior Softball? Rules, yes we need rules but they should be well defined and fair. The real issue is with the SSUSA as an organization and what they are trying to achieve. Thank God this is about what I do for fun and not what I do for my livelihood. Steven Imlay |
| May 9, 2007 sliplayer Men's 60 70 posts | Wood- Please do not presume to know how I feel about anything! To leave readers with the impression that you and I may be on the same page is a gross misconception. I have little interest in your one-sided view of this situation or with your questionable authoritative explanations of the snowbird rule. You continue to send emails to people that don’t agree with you stating you have additional facts. I would appreciate you sending those facts to me. Steven Imlay |
| May 9, 2007 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Steve: You are correct in your statement that I shouldn't pretend to be on the same page as you. We are not. I also should not presume to know how you feel. I do not. For both of these points, I do apologize. Also, my views have been 'one-sided' as are most of the people that respond. On the 'authoritarian' part... this wasn't my intent per se but I do see how it could be viewed this way. I feel that i am guilty of being insensitive on this. When I first responded to this thread it was because another friend of mine was taking a verbal beating. If I went too far in my effort to take the heat off of her, I will acknowledge this but she cannot defend herself as an employee of SSUSA. That's when I should have departed. I didn't. Admittedly, i didn't see the point in Stone's last message... my remarks were not welcome on this thread any longer. In all of these things, I was insensitive. Again, I do apologize. As far as my role in the investigation... I was involved as I honestly answered all of their questions. What I have said to others was the same that i have said to you, Steve. The only difference being that i was willing to provide you with details and spoke in generalities with others. What I did provide was primarily public record. i have never denied my role in this... to you or to anyone else. I will refrain from responding to this thread any further. Bob Woodroof |
| May 10, 2007 tattooball 774 posts | I AM GOING TO TYPE THIS ALL IN CAPS SO IT DOES NOT GET MIRED IN WITH ALL OF THE OTHER RESPONSES. BOB, UNLESS YOU LIVED AND WORKED SIDE BY SIDE STEVE DURING THE TIME IN QUESTION, WHAT FACTUAL INFORMATION COULD YOU POSSIBLY HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS MATTER? AGAIN FACTUAL!!! AS TO REST OF THE PEOPLE CONSERNING THIS THREAD WEATHER IT BE IN FAVOR OF STEVE OR SSUSA. LEAVE THIS CRAP ALONE. SSUSA SHOULD HAVE THIS THREAD REMOVED FROM THIS BOARD BECAUSE THIS DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROMOTE THE GOOD WILL AND SOFTBALL THAT SENIOR BALL SHOULD. SSUSA SHOULD IMMEDIATLY ENTERTAIN TALKS WITH STEVE TO TRY TO PUT THIS MATTER BEHIND AND WORK TOWARD MAKING 2008 A BETTER YEAR THAN LAST, AND LAST YEAR WASN'T BAD. STEVE NEEDS TO GET THE FACTUAL INFORMATION INTO SSUSA'S HANDS SO A INFORMED AND FACTUAL DISCUSSION CAN BE MADE BY BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED. AND LAST, THE SNOWBIRD RULE SUCKS. IT HAS THE RIGHT INTENTIONS BUT JUST LIKE SOMEONE WITH AN ALTERED BAT IT WILL BE USED FOR THE WRONG REASONS. SECONDLY ACCORDING TO THE WAY THE RULE IS WRITTEN IT IS OPEN TO INTERPITAION ON ALL COUNTS. ACCORDING TO THE RULE THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN I WILL NEVER BE ELIGABLE TO PLAY BECAUSE I DON'T LIVE ANYWHERE FOR 90 DAYS. BUT I DO LIVE MANY PLACES DURING THE YEAR. SSUSA AND STEVE NEED TO SIT DOWN AND MAKE THIS MATTER DISAPPEAR, IT HAS DONE NOTHING BUT HARM ALL OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED. THE ONLY ONES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN HARMED ARE ONES WITH AN OPINION, AND THE BAD THING ABOUT OPINIONS ARE THAT EVERYBODY HAS ONE AND ALMOST ALL ARE WRONG. I SURE THEY GET IT FIGURED OUT BECAUSE I NEED TO KNOW WHERE I CAN PLAY IN 4 YEARS. |
| May 10, 2007 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey TBall, You've got the right idea and sentiment regarding these most unfortunate sanctions which do not serve the best interest of the majority of Seniors across all boards. If SSUSA and the powers that be think they need a movement from the people to apply pressure to right these wrongs then they will let us know and we can proceed. Amnesty, understanding, fairness, no one left behind and a fresh start as Tball has mentioned would be a great ideas for ALL of us to embrace though it would come at the expense of those who sought after and benefited from the latest crackdowns. We will even forgive you, too. Some folks mistakenly think that being fair and generous and avoiding punishing people when it can be avoided are signs of weakness. They're wrong now and forever. It's the spirit of the law and not the letter of the law that's almost always the way to go. I'm up for going back to the bat violators earlier this year and letting up on them, too and let them know we care about them as people and fellow lovers of Senior Softball, and that all this stuff will be rectified and redefined without exception moving forward. I know it's a cliche already but let's not leave any of us behind. Doc or Steve or even Curt are all valuable members of our community and will learn what's necessary to maintain positive relationships to all of us. |
| May 14, 2007 Norq44 59 posts | I too have known Steve since I started playing senior softball in Las Vegas. I played against him and with him. It is very unfair what is happening with him. I am going to take a stand on this. I am not going to participate in any more SSUSA senior softball until this situation is rectified. |
| June 3, 2007 Longballr9 Men's 40 48 posts | As far as the Commercial D.L. goes, you are only allowed 1 D.L. If you have 2 or more, you will lose them all. I've had a CDL for 28 years...that's why I know. As far as Steve's deal goes...seems to me that a meeting with Terry is in order. I would think something could be arranged here. I'll get to meet Steve when I play with Lecak and everyone at Mesquite this week. C-ya there. |
| June 14, 2007 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Agree with the wood, get rid of the snowbird rule. There are too many cheaters out there. |
